I bet a honey badger couldn't fight The Pumble. I wouldn't be surprised if The Pumble eats badgers, both honey and plain.
I bet a honey badger couldn't fight The Pumble. I wouldn't be surprised if The Pumble eats badgers, both honey and plain.Does anyone remember that ‘honey badger don’t care. Honey badger don’t give a shit. It just takes what it wants’ video?
The nickname is perfect.
ETA I found it! So many parallels with Jack.
Dear heart you must squiggle (and it was posted earlier this thread)Where does she work? Action Fraud… or some scummy bit of the NHS or a third-party NHS supplier 🤷 Only the NHS are so wasteful to relish Pixie! View attachment 1660874
Nobody would begrudge her a salary and stability if she actually worked honestly for itView attachment 1660873It's this particular reply of the 2017 rent chaos that boils my hoops is my aneurysm. She experienced The Pov for what, a couple of weeks at the most. Funny how she was too proud to beg then but isn't now. Really makes you think. Self-employment/freelance work is often a bumpy ride. If you want a regular salary, get a job you stupid cow. "Well, you're just not very nice" - Fuck right off you cheeky fucking grifting cunt.
Quoting myself like Jack in a snowstorm but a friendly squig has asked Receipts Squig outright if they've spoken to the press. No reply as yet. I am watching.That particular squig has receipts. I wonder if they've done an interview/supplied information. They've been very consistent in facing down suspected Jack socks and flying monkeys and offered to show receipts again to them via zoom- which none of them want to take her up on. They also managed to get one months fees refunded by Patreon. It's not unlikely that journalist might do the story as a look at value for money from Patreon and use this story as an example of things that have gone wrong, without touching on the wider grift. I am not a lawyer but if you have someone with receipts who is willing to go on record and Jack gets the opportunity to comment, I can't see a major legal issue with it if it's just focused on the Patreon issue
Almost 500... almost a 344% increase, oddly enoughalso, “small flurry”? Was it not like 300-400 new patrons that day?
‘One of the Patreon subscribers who agreed to speak to the press.’Quoting myself like Jack in a snowstorm but a friendly squig has asked Receipts Squig outright if they've spoken to the press. No reply as yet. I am watching.
View attachment 1660925
There are two Patreon squigs that we know of who are unhappy and have receipts. I'm only judging from Twitter but I can't see either of them being shy about speaking to the press. There might well be others who have done likewise but not said anything online. I have real doubts about the Harrogate Squig though. They seem to swing between supporting Jack and taking the piss, I'm not completely ruling them out as genuine, Jack could easily check if she has a Claire in Harrogate subscribing, so the fact she's ignoring it makes me think there might be something to it but the way they're approaching it does seem off and inconsistent.
If only we could turn it upside down!LADS it’s thread 417 like the wonky tattoo!
She saw it coming.LADS it’s thread 417 like the wonky tattoo!
Could be multiple. Molly had invited anyone who'd had Patreon trouble to DM her a few weeks back and someone responded "Is this what I think it's for?". We know that Molly claims some journalists have been in contact with her so it's possible a few Patreon subscribers details have been passed over.‘One of the Patreon subscribers who agreed to speak to the press.’
Is it multiple people talking to the press about Jack in particular or Patreon subscribing in general me wonders.
15p smartprice sausage, do they think she's made of money? Try 7.5p dear squig.Someone’s been reading tattle
Subscriptions can be 'no-obligation' if they're set up that way, i.e. give me your money just because I'm so wonderful. (And if there are enough suckers out there to agree.) But a subscription definitely is 'obligation' if you promise rewards to those who sign up for it. Which is what Jack has done, and which is why she's a grifter, because she has delivered very little, if any of what she promised.Btw am I reading the second one right? She views subscription models as 'no-obligation'?
He's just heard Jack is CANCELLED!Look at Sir Frau go!
Yes this is where Jack tries to muddy the waters. She promised rewards for each tier for subscribers.Subscriptions can be 'no-obligation' if they're set up that way, i.e. give me your money just because I'm so wonderful. (And if there are enough suckers out there to agree.) But a subscription definitely is 'obligation' if you promise rewards to those who sign up for it. Which is what Jack has done, and which is why she's a grifter, because she has delivered very little, if any of what she promised.
Of course, Jack doesn't need to use wire coat hangers what with her can ringpull hack.Mamapapa Dearest
I hope if it is going down the Patreon route, they include a decent creator to show the gold standard and contrast it with Jack's rotten record. That gives a good creator a boost and immediately removes a lot of the excuses that will be made for Jack. More so if they happen to use a creator with disabilities.Yes this is where Jack tries to muddy the waters. She promised rewards for each tier for subscribers.
Yet in other tweets says it is right that creators are rewarded for their ongoing unpaid work. Implying patrons are funding her 'work' (whatever the fuck that actually is). But as you say she should've explicitly said re the Patreon 'subscribe to this and you will be funding my ongoing work and will get nothing back'. Like those adverts in Private Eye back in the day.
It does sound like there is going to be an expose of subscription services, with Jack being used as an exampleAbout bloody time tbh.
I'm not directing this at you - she can say that all she wants, but that's not how she structured her Patreon. And it's not an excuse for what she's doing now. If she wanted money just for being wonderful and with no rewards involved, that's what she should have set up. It's unethical, at best, to promise rewards and then renege on them because "there are other subscription models don't offer rewards".Yes this is where Jack tries to muddy the waters. She promised rewards for each tier for subscribers.
Yet in other tweets says it is right that creators are rewarded for their ongoing unpaid work.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?